Caution Stoopid Newbie

[Greg J. Zartman]

I'm assuming that "the problem" you are referring to is using any version of
Samba greater than V2.0.7?

I agree that downtime is not a good thing, but that doesn't mean that you
can't accept a certain amount of risk in implementing new code, hardware, or
anything else.  It depends on the situation.  My comment about being in a
non-critical environment referred to situation that this person currently is
in.  I believe he is trying to set this thing up at home with a handful of
PCs.  This is a completely different situation than if he were considering
implementing it on a corporate environment with several hundred clients.
Are both setups critical??  Apples and Oranges; Of course they aren't.  If
everyone took the all systems are critical approach, the Linux/Unix
community would be light years behind where it is now.

I don't think twice about trying new technology on select users in my
office.  Worse case, they can always goto the main server.  This may be
considered setting up a test environment, but I consider trying out a new
"bell or whistle" on a non-critical environment.  Regular users, performing
everyday activities, are much more likely to run across a problem with a new
setup than I would be working with it at home or something like that.

My two cents.

Greg




----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam Lang" <aalang at rutgersinsurance.com>
To: "Samba News" <samba-ntdom at samba.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 6:13 AM
Subject: Re: Caution Stoopid Newbie


> Problem is though, unless it is a test environment, you should always
treat
> your systems as critical.  Bad practice if you think otherwise.  Downtime
is
> never acceptable if you can avoid it.
>
> Adam Lang
> Systems Engineer
> Rutgers Casualty Insurance Company
> http://www.rutgersinsurance.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Greg J. Zartman" <greg at kwikfind.com>
> To: "Samba News" <samba-ntdom at samba.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 7:20 PM
> Subject: Re: Caution Stoopid Newbie
>
>
> > Jet,
> >
> > I think people can get all worked up about the different versions and
> which
> > should be used by the average users.  What it boils down to is this:
> > Version 2.0.7 is the current production release and is therefore
> officially
> > stable.  If you are in an environment that is sensitive to stability,
then
> > use that version.  With that said, I think that for just about anyone
> else,
> > version 2.2 alphaxx is the best solution. Especially if you are setting
up
> a
> > domain that included Win2k machines.  Yes, there is development going on
> > with the code, and not all of it is 100% stable.   From what I've seen,
> > however, the samba team does an excellent job of keeping the code
stable.
> >
> > I started from scratch with Linux (Mandrake 7.2) in January of this year
> and
> > downloaded Samba from CVS right off the bat.  The only problems that I
> have
> > run into is with my own mistakes.  The code has worked flawlessly.  If
you
> > are in a non-critical environment, I wouldn't hesitate to use Samba 2.2.
> >
> > Greg
>
>
>
>
>